iBill under investigation

article in the New York Daily Times

[Mr Bo Jangles]

Here's a real 'heads up' article [newyorkdailytimes.com]for any current client of iBill, or anyone who might have them on their list of possible 3rd party processors to consider. Seems there's real trouble in the iBill camp currently.

[Essex_boy]

Somewhat heavy.

[Ledfish]

The big problem with this article is that it is clear the writers did not do there homework. IBill does not have those clients money, First Data has it. Aside from all the problems, it isn't Ibill stealing the money, it's First Data...a bank that is doing it and then blaming it on IBill and it's clients. If I were the justice department, I'd be investigating IBill and First Data. Do you think First Data reported that money as income?

[Mr Bo Jangles]

If that's so, then I wonder if iBill has told its clients its First Data that is the bad guy, not us?

[Corey Bryant]

How do you determine First Data has the money? They might have some money per their agreement, but iBill, instead of going out & trying to locate another processor, decided to sue First Data to make First Data process for them.

-Corey

[ironbiker]

Apprently IBD, this large group that holds a 36.5% stake in Penthouse Media Group is in the process of buying out iBILL.

They said they will present a payout scheme no later than March 9th. I.e. we have to wait until March 9th for them to MAYBE show us a PLAN to pay us back.

I really wonder if we will get our money back from them. We have arround $50,000 just sitting there with them. I mean, what IS all this mess with First Data? Are they holding iBILL's money? Why won't ANYONE clarify this information. This is a total mess. I really wonder if we will ever get our money back and what consequences this will have for iBILL.

[Corey Bryant]

First Data told iBill a long time ago they will be required to locate another processor. FD also told them that they would be holding some more money until the chargeback time lapses - basically to protect First Data. It was all in the contracts. If iBill did not agree to the process, they should not have signed the contracts. This is not some little John Doe that maybe did not understand a contract, terms, or limits. This is two big companies doing business together. I am sure that contract went under the scrutiny of several attorneys.

First Data also gave iBill enough time to locate another processor. (I know - when I first heard, I emailed friends that were using their services and told them what was happening and set them up with another processor.) But instead of iBill finding another processor - they took First Data to court to try to get out of the contract. It did not work and for a few weeks - iBill did not even have a processor, underwriter, acquirer.

-Corey

[footwork]

I hope someone will tell us definitivly who has our money, Ibill or First Direct; What legal action is being taken against whom and the situation for European clients of Ibill

[Cheyenne]

The money that Ibill claims First Data is holding is small in comparasion to the overall issue. Ibill has retained tens of thousands of their clients money after the break from First Data and continue to do so. March 9th came and went, like many other promised dates, with no significant news.

Ibill had been my credit card processor since 1998. When the announcment of troubled times and the dispute with First Data came about, I stayed with them on their promise to get back on track. Since then it has been a series of dissapointments, just as the article in NYT reports. The article sums it up well from a client's experience. After a few more months of not getting paid and being issued one broken promise after another, I finally moved to another processor. Ibill owes me nearly 20k.

Cheyenne

[edited by: lorax at 6:23 pm (utc) on Mar. 10, 2005]
[edit reason] removed call to action [/edit]

[ironbiker]

Apparently iBILL IS Toccata:

Check this link from the wayback machine:
[web.archive.org...]

Check out the address they had before. Same as iBILL's

[jagsanger]

Hi - IBill was an aggregator, this is against the card assoc regs, and was only a matter of time before they were rumbled and called to account.

First Data's role in this was essentially benign.

Regards
Jag